The present invention relates to the automatic control of the path of travel of a vehicle and, in particular, to techniques for automatically controlling the path of travel of a vehicle that cannot generally be superseded or disengaged from onboard once the automatic control system is engaged.
Security onboard any type of vehicle, particularly a passenger vehicle, such as an air vehicle, ship, boat, train, bus, or the like, is an imperative aspect of the vehicle operations. In particular, it is crucial that the personnel authorized to operate a particular vehicle, such as pilots onboard an aircraft, are the only individuals permitted to have control over the operations of the vehicle, which include taking-off, landing, and the flight of an aircraft, for example. If anyone without authorization to operate a vehicle, particularly a passenger vehicle or vehicle carrying hazardous cargo, obtains control over the operations of the vehicle, the potential consequences could be catastrophic. Particularly catastrophic is a situation in which unauthorized person(s) fly an aircraft carrying passengers and/or any type of harmful material into a densely populated area where the aircraft crashes. As such, various techniques for restricting access to the operational controls of a vehicle have been developed.
For example, one technique for restricting access to the controls of a vehicle involves utilizing a door, such as a cockpit door in an aircraft, to the area where the controls and the authorized operators of the vehicle are located. The door securely locks and may be made of bullet-proof material. Thus, once the authorized operators of the vehicle are in position at the controls of the vehicle, they may lock the door and therefore prevent anyone else from gaining access to the travel controls of the vehicle. Typically, the door may be unlocked only by the authorized operators of the vehicle. In addition, because the door may be made of bullet-proof material, even if someone outside the door tried to forcibly enter through the door, their attempts would be unsuccessful. The general idea behind the locking, bullet-proof door is that even if the security of the rest of the vehicle is jeopardized, the authorized operators will be protected and capable of safely bringing the vehicle to a stop, such that authorities can help resolve the threat onboard the vehicle. The downfall to this security technique, however, is that the operators are capable of unlocking and opening the door, such that at least one of the operators may decide to open the door depending upon the circumstances of the situation. For example, one of the operators may decide to open the door if there is a threat to the physical safety of one or more of the other personnel and/or passengers onboard the vehicle. As such, an operator may decide that the risk to the physical safety of one or more of the other personnel and/or passengers onboard the vehicle is greater if the door remains locked than if the door is opened. Once the door is opened, however, the chances of safely bringing the vehicle to a stop where authorities can help resolve the threat onboard the vehicle greatly decreases.
Another technique for increasing the safety onboard a vehicle is to employ an armed guard on every operating vehicle, such as the air marshals onboard some aircraft. The armed guard is authorized to eliminate any threat to the safety of the vehicle and/or the passengers and personnel onboard the vehicle. Therefore, if an individual onboard the vehicle attempts to gain access to any restricted area of the vehicle, such as the cockpit and/or the flight controls of an air vehicle, the armed guard is authorized and trained to prevent that individual from gaining access to the restricted areas. This security technique has various downsides, however. Similar to the locking, bullet-proof door example, the armed guard also has the decision-making power regarding the course of action depending upon the circumstances of each situation. For instance, the armed guard may decide not to try to prevent an individual from gaining access to a restricted area if there is a threat to the physical safety of one or more of the other personnel and/or passengers onboard the vehicle. The armed guard may decide that the risk to the physical safety of one or more of the other personnel and/or passengers onboard the vehicle is greater if the armed guard tries to prevent the individual from gaining access to the restricted area than if the individual gains access to the restricted area. In addition, if more than one individual onboard the air vehicle aids in the attempt to gain access to a restricted area, they may be able to overpower the armed guard. Because there is no way to know how many armed guards would be needed to prevent more than one individual from threatening the safety of the vehicle, and because it is not economically or practically feasible to have a team of armed guards on each vehicle, the armed guard security technique is not capable of preventing all security threats to a vehicle.
In light of the shortfalls of the above described security techniques, particularly with respect to preventing unauthorized persons from accessing the flight controls of an aircraft, there is a need in the industry for a technique that conclusively prevents unauthorized persons from gaining access to the controls of a vehicle and therefore threatening the safety of the passengers onboard the vehicle, and/or other people in the path of travel of the vehicle, thereby decreasing the amount of destruction individuals onboard the vehicle would be capable of causing. In particular, there is a need for a technique that ensures the continuation of the desired path of travel of a vehicle by removing any type of human decision process that may be influenced by the circumstances of the situation, including threats or further violence onboard the vehicle